commune_france_fetch_source_excerpt

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool fetches an excerpt but does not disclose what happens when the source_key is not found, whether the excerpt is truncated at the nearest word boundary, or what the exact format of the excerpt is. It also doesn't mention any rate limits or other behavioral constraints.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that is concise and front-loads the primary action ('Fetch a short text excerpt') followed by the key parameter guidance. No wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool has 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and parameter semantics reasonably well. However, it is missing behavioral details like error handling, return format, and typical use cases, which an agent might need for correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has 2 parameters with 50% coverage (source_key has a description, max_chars does not). The description clarifies that source_key accepts an index, title keyword, or URL fragment, which adds meaning beyond the schema's generic description. It also implies max_chars controls the length of the excerpt, partially compensating for the schema gap.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Fetch') and a specific resource ('a short text excerpt from a curated source'), and indicates it can be retrieved by index or title keyword. This distinguishes it from the sibling tools, which handle source listing, commune lookup, etc., though it doesn't explicitly name a sibling it is not.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage context by mentioning 'curated source' and by the sibling tools (e.g., 'commune_france_get_sources' likely lists available sources). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus the alternatives, nor does it give conditions like when to use a source index vs. a keyword.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.